Well with the announcement of the D800 it has got me wondering....Shall I get rid of my D700 and purchase the upcoming D800? I cannot afford to buy the D800 outright and keep the D700, so it either stays and I keep it for the foreseeable future or it gets sold and I get the D800.

This may seem like a pointless post but after doing some reading and research it has got me thinking.

I love the D700 for it's versatility from portraits through to action shots, it's incredibly versatile and not forgetting it's fantastic low light capabilities, also the added bonus of shooting at 8fps with the MB-D10 really helps when I'm taking those actions shots. The addition of the EN-EL4a gives me plenty of shots without a recharge, so all in all I'm happy. However now the D800 is thrown into the midst and I'm left wondering should I upgrade. I have gone through all the pros and cons and I still am left confused.

My first reaction is don't jump at every new piece of technology just for a upgrade. Yes, it may have new features, but is the price you pay really worth it? Usually the answer is no. Spend your time and energy on upgrading your arsenal of lenses. That's my humble opinion.

p.s. I'm still shooting with a 7 year old body and have no intentions up upgrading anytime soon.

Thomas, My main lenses are the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 and the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VRii.

I mainly take action shots and portraits but recently I have been exploring landscapes and I'm really beginning to enjoy it. I have been asked by a friend to do his wedding later in the year so will be investing in a good portrait lens like the Nikon 135mm f2 or the 85mm 1.4G. I feel the D800 would give better results on landscape and portrait.

First of all, congratulations: You use excellent lenses that don't need to fear the 36MP sensor/resolution from the D800. So you'll be definitely well equipped with a D800 for all situations where you need a maximum of details.
But you should make up your mind on two things regarding action shots:
- is 4fps (5fps in DX-crop) enough speed for you? If not, the D800 might not be your favourite choice
- What about the ISO that you normally use when you need fast shutter-speed to stop motion in action shots? Is ISO 3200 enough for you? Then the D800 should deliver (based on the images that you can find on the web today). There are people (including me) that believe that if you downsize your FX-shots from a D800 to just 12MP the resulting signal-to-noise ratio should at least meet the D700 performance. Some are even going so far as to claim that D3s performance should be in reach. So at least in theory you should be able to trade resolution for ISO performance with the D800. Which would make it a very flexible camera indeed!

Thomas thanks for your comments. Gives some food for thought. I shall experiment with the D700 regarding the 4-5fps. Will take some action shots and see how they look. As for ISO performance I very rarely go above 3200 so in that retrospect the D800 would suffice.

I guess I shall just have to wait and see what the reviews bring and take it from there. I hope the D800 can be as flexible as the D700, with the added benefit of the 36MP.

The last few days I've been working with a D700 + 85mm 1.8 + extension tubes for macro photography.
The good thing is: The images looked very nice - great image quality.
The bad thing is: I was really missing the live view for critical manual focusing.
What I'd be missing by doing what I'm doing usually: The possibility to crop in order to get more reach - with a still high resolution.

The owner of that D700 I was using could really need a new camera. Why? She's a photographer living from "that camera" since it was released. The rubber parts are not far from falling off and every third shot is half black.
The problem: She cannot afford a new camera.

The D800E looks like an almost perfect camera to me at the moment. Would I upgrade from the D700? Hard question. But I think I would, as the features of the D800 fit me quite a bit better than those of the D700. Live view (I really missed it today on the D700) and the high resolution (crop for super-tele I'm using very often) are a nice combination; the video mode looks great as well. And the missing AA filter of the D800E offers that extra sharpness I'd prefer over the moiré reduction.

The D700 is still a great camera for portraits and it's faster than the D800...

What I would do: I'd wait for the D800(E) to be released and then watch the price. In about half a year you can expect the price to fall and that's when I'd go for it.

I'm keeping my D700 for a few more years and waiting to see what happens with mirrorless cameras. If a more pro level mirrorless comes along with everything I'm looking for, then I'd dump my SLR in a heartbeat. Why wouldn't I?...if the solution had good lenses, good video, and professional image quality? For now I'm VERY happy with my Nikon D700 and Nikon V1. I use the V1 much more than the D700 these days.

Hello openbloom, and welcome to the friendly Camera Labs forum!
To enjoy your stay here please have a look at the house-rules!
----
I think the D700 has many satisfied customers that are currently thinking about what a D800 can do for them. That was what I tried to address in my posts above. But if you don't really miss a thing from your D700, why upgrade?
The question for me is: What does mirrorless bring that you're currently missing?

For me it's not going mirrorless just to be doing something differently, but I like the smaller package. Like I said, it would have to give me really good quality like I get out of my D700 right now. I'd be willing to stick with the heavier/larger SLR if that's what it took to get the image quality I wanted. I'm curious to see how well the Fuji X-Pro 1 will do, but I'm a little skeptical about it so far, given their not so great focusing that people complain about on the X100 and the 'white orb' issue on the X10. I like the concept of the X-Pro 1 though. It looks like an awesome camera.